I got this email from Veronica, years ago,
who was kind enough to answer me,
as I wanted to know whether the title was 'Comes dawn'-
as quote often it is quoted as such :

Hi Ilza,

I never titled it "Comes the Dawn" -
- that was something it picked up along the way.
I never WOULD have given it such a pretentious, flatulent title.
In fact, I never titled it at all,
but because I had to for registration purposes
( and also to combat all the bogus titles it has been given by others:
"Comes the Dawn", "Endurance", I can't even remember them all),
I call it "After a While".

But titles are not copyrighted,
so I can't really prevent people from calling it whatever they like,
and since it was published in the Ann Landers column as
"Comes the Dawn",
it's hard to get people to stop calling it that.

Hello,
I would like to read the Poem "After a While" or "Comes the Dawn" by Vernica or Hugh at my sons funeral as a reading. I would like to be able to state the Author. If if the poem begins
"Afer a while you learn the subtle difference
Between holding a hand and chaining a soul,
And you learn that love doesn't mean leaning
And company doesn't mean security......."

Could you please let me know the author if you do know.
Thanks in advance,
Mary

After a while you learn
the subtle difference between
holding a hand and chaining a soul
and you learn
that love doesn't mean leaning
and company doesn't always mean security.
And you begin to learn
that kisses aren't contracts
and presents aren't promises
and you begin to accept your defeats
with your head up and your eyes ahead
with the grace of woman, not the grief of a child
and you learn
to build all your roads on today
because tomorrow's ground is
too uncertain for plans
and futures have a way of falling down
in mid-flight.
After a while you learn
that even sunshine burns
if you get too much
so you plant your own garden
and decorate your own soul
instead of waiting for someone
to bring you flowers.
And you learn that you really can endure
you really are strong
you really do have worth
and you learn
and you learn
with every goodbye, you learn...

But titles are not copyrighted,
so I can't really prevent people from calling it whatever they like,
and since it was published in the Ann Landers column as
"Comes the Dawn",
it's hard to get people to stop calling it that.

Ian, I believe this is an object lesson for those among us who feel "untitled" is an appropriate name for a poem.

I have this poem on my web site (doghause.com) and I got an email from some one who claims that they wrote it, NOT Veronica. Does anyone have Veronica's contact information so I can confirm and try to get to the bottom of this? Thanks so much.

ACTUALLY.... if you Google "Comes the Dawn" you get many listing of anonymous, some with names and the most prominent name will be Veronica Shofftall. It will also say that she copyrighted it in 1971. However, she claims âit was first published in my college yearbook 1972, a book called The Ivy, from Mohawk Valley Community College in Utica, NY.â She later officially copyrighted it.

The version of the poem to which she may, or may not, have legal copyright, is not the original version. And it was CALLED "Comes the Dawn" because the last line was, before she edited it, ".... with every good-bye comes the dawn."

The poem actually went like this:

Comes The Dawn

After a while, you learn the subtle difference
between holding a hand and chaining a soul.
And you learn that loving doesnât mean leaning
and company isnât security.
(Kisses arenât contracts and presents arenât promises.)

After a while you begin to accept your defeats
with your head up and your eyes open,
with the grace of a woman, not the grief of a child.
And you learn to build your roads on today
because tomorrowâs ground is too uncertain
and the inevitable has a way of crumbling in mid-flight.

After a while you learn that even sunshine burns
if you stand too long in one place.

So, you plant your own garden and decorate your own soul
instead of waiting for someone else to bring you flowers.
And you learn you really can endure,
that you really do have worth.
You learn that with every good-bye comes the dawn.

Hence, the title. Veronica Shofftall may have copyrighted her rendition of this poem, but she didn't copyright the original version. The original has been out in the public domain for some 30 years. It CAN'T be copy righted now. It's public and has been long before the internet became a common, household entity. I know. I wrote it and made the mistake or sharing it with a large group of people, well over 30, because I made 30 copies of it and ran out long before people stopped asking me for it.

So, no matter how much her name is on her version, which belongs to her, this is the original.

Judith, are you saying that you wrote the poem you just posted, and published it (i.e. shared it around publicly) in about 1974, and that it preceded Veronica's version? I'm not disputing you, as I have no knowledge of the facts, but obviously there are a few discrepancies floating around!

One point someone might be able to clarify is the distinction (if any) in the USA between acquiring copyright, and registering copyright. I may well be mistaken, but I thought authorship, without registration, was all that was needed to acquire copyright, and that registration was only for the purpose of placing the copyright ownership on public record in order to avoid disputes, and possibly to enable the ownership period to be extended. Maybe the law on that has changed since the 1970s.

Well, let me see, I have work in The Advocate (Volume 12), Industrial Digest (Although that isn't a poem), on a few E-zines, one of my published poems is "I Would Be Loving You Still" (e-zine, but I don't know if it's searchable - a poem about an actor I used to have a crush on :^D- embarrassing, true, but... there ya go!).

The rest I would have to dig out of a box in the attic to tell you exactly where to find them.

Like I said, this poem got away from me when I was quite young. If it had remained as "Author Unknown" or "anonymous" I probably wouldn't have bothered to say anything. But you can tell by the relationship between the TITLE (Comes the Dawn, by which it is so commonly known) vs. Ms. Shofftall's version of the poem that something is fishy. She says she has no idea where that crazy title would come from? How about because it was part of the last line until she edited it out.

The fact is, several people claim it. Mostly it is either attributed to her or to "anonymous/author unknown". I'd be willing to say that this is the most widely plagiarized poem in the world! I didn't mind when it was anonymous or author unknown. It was like my secret gift to the world. And if she would simply admit that she edited a poem she found (which she actually did in the quote in my prior post) so that it was more to her liking and copyrighted her version I'd have no problem with it at all. But there is a difference between tweaking someone else's work and claiming it as your own and being the generative source of the spark.

While I have continued to write and always will, I haven't submitted anything to anyone in a long time. Style is unmistakable. If you like I can put some of my other published works in here and you can compare.

What ever, Les. You apparently have an emotional investment of some sort. As I said, that particular poem is not representative of my best work. I think I called it "embarrassing". You just asked me what else I could point to as published.

I volunteered to post a couple more published items (some that aren't embarrassing), but given your attitude that may be a waste of time. At this point, I don't think it is possible for you to be objective. Of course, I am new here and it may be that objectivity is not inherent in this site at all and that critical analysis is not something anyone should expect here.

But the FACT is that the person who claims "Comes the Dawn" most often (of the several who do claim it) did NOT write that poem, although she did edit it and copyrighted her edited version several years later.

I, on the other hand, never copyrighted it at all. As I said, it got out in the public sector before I even understood the implications of copyright laws. And the FACT is, that it is so well distributed that it would be very difficult for anyone to PROVE authorship. I never disputed her copyright of her own version of that poem. I simply dispute that she was the original generative spark... because I know she wasn't.

Les isn't the only person who reads this site, nor does he necessarily represent the views of all its contributors. I very much enjoy both the Shofftall and the Evans versons of this poem and what Judith says would explain why the Shofftall title seems unrelated to the content of the poem, which set me wondering when I first came across it several years ago.

As someone who has spent a good deal of time recently checking historical 'facts' for a project, only to discover that many don't even meet ' 'balance of probabilities' criteria let alone approach beyond reasonable doubt, I have ample evidence of the fallibility of benevolent human memory, let alone that of people with a vested interest in a given viewpoint - and I'm not casting stones at any individual - I'm as guilty as the rest. (as Marian NYC could testify!)

What we end up with is two versions of an interesting idea and a dispute as to whose idea it originally was, which we outsiders are unlikely to be able to resolve. I am confused as to whether the original poem published in the yearbook was accredited to Veronica or Judith - from my reading of the above Veronica didn't actually say she wrote it, but we have no access to the yearbook to find out. I suggest we all just enjoy them for their differences and similarities., just as we enjoy all Anon's creative output in its many versions.

And Judith, if you would be kind enough to post some work which you don't find embarrassing (I've got a drawerful of my efforts waiting for bonfire night) - I would like to read them.

To be content that a poem one has midwifed manages to survive on its own is certainly a commendable attitude, Judith. Please stick around, and feel free to post some more stuff, if you have it. Les has shown himself here to be a reasonable person, and may yet be dissuaded.

Les, I'm not trying to be provocative, but to me 'merely lik(ing) to believe that one person was responsible for the poem and not two' is close to a vested interest. Preferring the version of anything you first heard and believing the person you first hear accredited with the work to be responsible for creating it, is a natural bias - we've all been surprised and disappointed to find songs and musicwe thought written by a performer have actually been produced in numerous versions before and since and a re even based on classical music tunes etc.

Equally, not copyrighting a poem doesn't necessarily mean you don't care about it, it could just be that you aren't particularly commercially minded. That's like saying that if you don't spend as much money on your children as your neighbour, you love them less than he loves his.

Sorry to disappoint you Les, but Hugh is right, I was just reading the new thread. And if I'm only allowed to post opinions that agree with yours, this ceases to be a discussion foumr and becomes something quite different. I felt that your initial response to Judith was unfair and the latest one downright insulting. I don't know anything about either claimant to the poem's authorship and, as I said in the earlier post, would prefer to just enjoy both versions - and I am completely mistified as to how my post is supposed to discredit Ilza, for whom I have always had great respect.

Marian, if you are not trying to discredit Ilza, I can accept that. Since she and I are saying essentially the same thing.

I would like to see a copy of the original newspaper article which posted the poem. What version did they post? Who did they credit as the author, etc? Any librarians out there who could find the original text for us? I do not find the date, or an article citing the exact poem on the internet, though there are several references made to "comes the dawn".

I don't know who wrote the work. However, I think that the fact that this discussion exists shows the problems of putting one's work out to the public.

IanB talked about the distinction between legal copyright in the US- if you wrote it, you own it; and the registration of copyright. Unfortunately, legal copyright is difficult to enforce, and impossible if you let works be used. (This is why Disney goes around suing daycare providers who paint Mickey Mouse on the wall of the room- they're enforcing their copyrights and trademarks.)

Unfortunately, without some proof of original publication, or something like a dated letter, this controversy may never be solved. And who would this proof be given to? The work is essentially in the public domain.

Currently several sites are acknowledging Judith's claim. None of them are authoritative sources. (And one site lists 'Copyright 1999- Kathleen Kennedy)

I do hope that USP users and others who write poetry are taking this to heart, and doing what they can to protect their copyrights. One suggestion that I've heard over the years is to mail a copy of your work to yourself as a certified letter, and do not open it. The postmark should be able to serve as proof.

I too, Marian, have a great respect for you ( and you all)
- I didn't write the poem, so it is not a matter of discreting me, right ?
The way I see it, it is just a matter of opinion,
and I too feel comfortable enough to post my opinion,
hoping I am not insulting anyone.

I was given a book the other day, Chicken soup for whoever heart,
I don't even recall the name, pretty silly,
but I was reading it anyway, and it was so full of misquotes it drove me bananas

This problem of authorship is huge and stupid, and it surprises me
to find out so many mistakes, misquotes, wrong author, etc on the web ...

I have known this specific poem for over 20 years
- even before I owned a computer . . .
and as for me, it remains a poem by Mrs. Veronica unless someone can
convince me otherwise. . .
.........................
I posted a couple of days ago ( poetry quotation) that I once was looking for a poem by Helen Hunt Jackson ( using its title),
and I found myself inside a "Mad about you" site ...
as if actress Helen Hunt had written it . . .

Go figure !
.........................
in 1999 I was involved in a "whodunit quest"
started by Ivan Almeida and Benjamin Rossen, who were
trying to find the actual author of "If I could live my life again"
( Don Herold, of course ! I knew that since I was 12 years old ! ,
no kidding ... )

That same year I got in contact with his daughter, Doris,
to get some further information about her father
( her husband's family - as far as I can recall from that phone conversation - was from Sweden, where I was staying at that time,
and I remember talking to him a couple of times too,
he was such a gentleman )

Ilza, I think that one reason the internet is vulnerable to so many misquotes is that basically it is a lazy man's medium. I too run across misquotes all of the time. While researching this quote for instance, one of the websites credited Mother Theresa with the quotation.

We, the unwilling,
led by the unknowing,
are doing the impossible
for the ungrateful.
We have done so much,
for so long,
with so little,
we are now qualified
to do anything
with nothing.

--Anonymous

Even though I think it would be an appropriate thing for her to say, I honestly don't believe it should be credited to her unless it can be verified as you suggest.

As far as this poem goes, I definitely think copies of the original newspaper post would be useful for those of us who have not seen the poem with the title "comes the dawn".

If I had my life over, I would dare to make more mistakes.
I would relax.
I would limber up.
I would be sillier than I have been on this trip.
I would take fewer things seriously.
I would take more chances.
I would go more places.
I would climb more mountains, swim more rivers and watch more sunsets.
I would eat more ice cream and fewer beans.
I would have more real troubles and fewer imaginary ones.

You see, I have been one of those people who live prudently and prophylactically, hour after hour, day after day. Oh, I've had my moments... and if I had to do it again I would have more of them; one after another, instead of living so many years ahead of each day.

I have been one of those people who never go anywhere without aspirin, a thermometer, a gargle, a map, a raincoat and a parachute. If I had to do it over, I would travel lighter.

I would start barefoot earlier in the spring and stay that way later in the fall.
I would keep later hours.
I would have more lovers.
I would throw more parties.
I would ride more merry-go-rounds.
Iâd pick more daisies.

Of course, you canât unfry an egg,
but thereâs no law against thinking about it.

If I had my life to live over, I would try to make more mistakes.
I would relax.

I would be sillier than I have been this trip. I would be less hygienic.
I would go more places.
I would climb more mountains and swim more rivers.
I would eat more ice-cream and less spinach.
I would have more actual troubles and fewer imaginary troubles.

You see, I have been one of those fellows who live prudently,
hour after hour, day after day. Oh, I have had my moments.
But if I had it to do over again, I would have more of them - a lot more.
I never go anywhere without a thermometer, a map,
a raincoat and a parachute. If I had it to do over, I would travel lighter.

If I had my life to live over,
I would start going barefoot a little earlier in the spring
and stay that way a little later in the fall.
I would have more dogs. I would keep later hours.
I would have more sweethearts. I would fish more.
I would ride more merry-go-rounds. I would go to more circuses.

In a world in which practically everybody else seems to be consecrated
to the gravity of the situation, I would rise to glorify the levity of the situation.
For I agree with Will Durant, who said, "Gaiety is wiser than wisdom."

If I had my life to live over, Iâd pick more daisies.

1953
..............
Don was a very famous humorist, cartoonist, writer,
but he also worked as an advertising consultant,
and for those who like advertising ( I do ... ) a great book is
his "Humor in advertising".

I blame word processors for the thickness of books these days. Would the last Harry Potter have been so thick if Rowling had to pay a typist by the page (even with all the cash she has now)? The first one written in cafes while her baby slept was a much more sensible length.

We have gotten off the subject. The question at hand is who is the originator of "after awhile" (or whatever you want to call it). True, we may never be able to prove definitively who wrote the original. But I, for one, am fascinated that there are two individuals who claim it - one is clearly lying. There is no money at stake. Nor even reputation, really. So why would they do it? Do they know each other? I'm dying of curiosity!

Nick Nace wrote: "there are two individuals who claim it - one is clearly lying"

NOT NECESSARILY. Mis-attributions abound, and most of them are innocent. Careless, sometimes, but innocent. "A poem FROM so-and-so" can get passed along as "a poem BY so-and-so." A poem quoted IN a book by Some Guy gets passed along as being BY Some Guy.

I know of a poem that was wrongly attributed to Appolinaire in more than one anthology, because the first line of the poem is "Appolinaire said:" and someone didn't realize that was PART OF the poem.

The internet spreads misinformation just as fast as it does good information.

Judith posted on this thread that the poem is hers. Ronnie Shoffstal copyrighted the poem and states that she is the author. The 2 "versions" of the poem are much too much alike for coincidence - one of the two persons is not telling the truth, and I just can't understand the motivation for this (and am very very curious as to who did, in fact, write this particular piece).

This isn't a case of Internet misattribution of authorship. We apparently have two self-proclaimed originators.

I can accept that they created their respective different versions of the poem, and to that extent they are not 'lying'. But who plagiarised whom? On that, one of them is surely being economical with the truth. There is too much text in common for this to be subconscious plagiarism. The author of whichever is the later version must have seen the earlier one. She may have been motivated by a worthy desire to improve on it. Maybe it was in an anonymous format, which precluded acknowledgment of the author and was a temptation not to acknowledge it at all.

I doubt whether it is possible to infer reliably which version is the later from examining the textual differences, or from judging which version is the better. My personal opinion is that the 'After a While' version is the more polished in wording and format, which suggests to me that it was achieved by polishing the other, but I accept that that's subjective.

Short of a confession, it seems that an answer to everyone's satisfaction will only come from uncontestable evidence, if such exists, about the dates when the versions were first written, e.g. dates of circulation, publication, copyrighting, or whatever.

I am still unclear as to whether in the US in the early 1970s some sort of registration was necessary for copyright to subsist, or whether it subsisted automatically in an author by virtue of authorship and such registration was only for evidentiary purposes to aid enforcement.

I agree, Ian....I personally know of certain phrases or jokes that I' m confident that I came up with,,,,,the bumper sticker "nuke the whales" for example ..or the umpires kicking dirt into Billy Martin's grave.... and then seeing them in print or hearing them later.....now these can be attributed to "spontaneous combustion" a joke so obvious that several people would have NO trouble coming up with the same phrase or concept....but a poem is a totally different animal.

"Under the law in effect before 1978, copyright was secured either on the date a work was published or on the date of registration if the work was registered in unpublished form. In either case, the copyright endured for a first term of 28 years from the date it was secured. During the last (28th) year of the first term, the copyright was eligible for renewal. The current copyright law has extended the renewal term from 28 to 47 years for copyrights that were subsisting on January 1, 1978, making these works eligible for a total term of protection of 75 years."

First, let me thank you for your beautiful words. I first saw them about 10 years ago on a poster in a catalog, and I immediately wrote them down and pinned them to my mirror. I still think of them whenever a relationship is breaking up.

My question is, I could swear there were several paragraphs before the "After a while..." part. I know I have it written down somewhere, but I just can't put my fingers on it right now.

A long, long time ago a very young girl passed around copies of a poem she wrote. She had no knowledge of copyright laws and no idea that others sometimes take credit for things they don't really do. I had no idea this poem had ever gone anywhere let alone that it's authorship was discredited, disputed or it's original format changed. Judith Evans wrote the original poem. My mother was in the small group that got the copy. She made copies for us girls and it was read at her funeral. There is no money for Judith to be gained by claiming her original work now.

I am the author of this poem. My name is Natalia Vargas. All I want, is to state my truth.I am not crazy, not looking for fame, not looking for royalties or even "revenge." I state this now in 2008, because I never realized what an impact my poem would have - how it would touch the hearts of so many people.I wrote the poem in the middle of my first real heartbreak as a young woman. I was sitting in a chair, in my room, at my mother's house. I even remember the shadows of the day, and even the feel of my journal. I was in such pain, not believing how such simple words, "I don't love you" could cause so much hurt. I had begun to learn how to grieve an dying relationship for the first time. The words were real, true and heartfelt. In order to clear up some confusion, in the mid 90's, I was a 20 yr old young woman working for a small local newspaper in a rurual South Texas town called the Carrizo Springs Javelin. I've always written small stories, poems, etc . . since a young girl. I came across a generic advertisement for a poetry contest. I entered "Comes the Dawn," and sent it to a Florida address. This was in 1995. That was the last I ever heard of it. Young and naive, I never questioned the contest, its motives, or its ethics. Years later, in the age of the internet, I stumbled across my poem and was shocked to see how popular it had become. I was angered to see how many times it had been published in various books by other people claiming to have written it. And I was deeply hurt to see how so many claimed to be it's author. I did concact Veronica Shofstall, and even received several nasty emails from her. But I never pursued ownership, simply because I was content in knowing the truth. I was in the middle of a deeply stressful time in personal life and felt that ownership of the poem was a lost cause.I am very happy n the knowledge that my poem has helped and conforted so many people. That is the ultimate repayment for me. As for the controversy of authorship, I am stating that I am the original author. I wrote it in 1995 and unless me and the other "author" are on some sort of telepathic/cosmic connection, then there is no way the others could have possibly written it. I am extrmemely interested in seeing publishing of the poems from the early 70's as I was born in 1975. I am very interested because I still have the orginal poem in my possession, the orginal paper with all the scribblings and scratchings from editing.Whether or not this issue ever comes to a close, only God knows. All I know is, I am the author and I will always be.

If you still have your original, please post here what you claim to be the original words of it.

If anyone has incontrovertible evidence of the poem being published earlier than 1975, not necessarily in the same words but in sufficiently similar wording to preclude mere coincidence, do you accept that your creation of a version in 1975 must have been a case of unconscious copying? Or, as you say, some sort of telepathic/cosmic connection.

I have no vested interest in this controversy. Just literary curiosity.

I think the picture are taken with a right position and enough lighting. I don't think that's the best choice but we should try on it. It doesn't looks like in the night shot. free online advertising |jobs|hospital beds